Jump to content
 

A Nod To Brent - a friendly thread, filled with frivolity, cream teas and pasties. Longing for the happy days in the South Hams 1947.

gwrrob

By gwrrob,
in Layout topics

 Share

Recommended Posts

7TunnelShunter

7TunnelShunter

Posted
Posted

Vey nice but what's happened to the twin horns?

 

According to an early post on the Flying Banana thread ... before it went off on a PECOBOO Esk trip ... the twin horns were fitted later after an incident with PW gangs not hearing the cars approach. The original/earlier variants had horns mounted high up on each side - not supplied/modelled by Dapol. I believe Dapol have therefore got it right in including them with the latter livery variations and not with no. 11.

 

"According to J H Russell the air horns on the sides of the cab were provided after complaints from PWay staff about the quiet approach of the new railcars. Pictures from around 1936 don't appear to show visible horns on the Nos. 8-16 series as built. They were possibly behind the grille under the nose. Some later pictures show horns under the nose and on the cabsides. The latter could apparently be heard about three miles away. Russell's book has a picture of No.11 in 1938 with no horns visible at the bottom but cabside horns fitted. By this time the bogie covers had also disappeared."... Dapol Streamlined Railcar Thread - Page 21 Post 502

 

 

Waits for fall out from the Flying Banana Intelligencia.

 

Best wishes and keep up the stunning work

 

Chris

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold
The Stationmaster

The Stationmaster

Posted
  • RMweb Gold
Posted

According to an early post on the Flying Banana thread ... before it went off on a PECOBOO Esk trip ... the twin horns were fitted later after an incident with PW gangs not hearing the cars approach. The original/earlier variants had horns mounted high up on each side - not supplied/modelled by Dapol. I believe Dapol have therefore got it right in including them with the latter livery variations and not with no. 11.

 

"According to J H Russell the air horns on the sides of the cab were provided after complaints from PWay staff about the quiet approach of the new railcars. Pictures from around 1936 don't appear to show visible horns on the Nos. 8-16 series as built. They were possibly behind the grille under the nose. Some later pictures show horns under the nose and on the cabsides. The latter could apparently be heard about three miles away. Russell's book has a picture of No.11 in 1938 with no horns visible at the bottom but cabside horns fitted. By this time the bogie covers had also disappeared."... Dapol Streamlined Railcar Thread - Page 21 Post 502

 

 

Waits for fall out from the Flying Banana Intelligencia.

 

Best wishes and keep up the stunning work

 

Chris

 

Dunno about the horns but i have been and put them right on the matter of lamps. (for, I think, at least the second time on that thread plus once on the relevant Dapol Digest page - which Dapol did take notice of to their credit).

 

Usual comment - as ever I do wish people would check before quoting whatever as 'a prototype fact' when what they say clearly isn't a fact but something they have imagined. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold
Limpley Stoker

Limpley Stoker

Posted
  • RMweb Gold
Posted

 

Well, after a week of service in and around South Hams I see that the railcar is so aerodynamic that no leaves have been blown off the trees.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold
The Stationmaster

The Stationmaster

Posted
  • RMweb Gold
Posted (edited)

It will be interesting to see the posts that will tell us what's wrong with it.

 

There's something not quite right about the smokebox door - I think it's to do with the numberplate which looks to be very slightly too low and the shedplate looks too big and is definitely too low while the handrail curve from the smokebox side onto the smokebox front is not correct.  There looks to be a very poor representation of the lance cock which is unusual as nowadays everybody else seems to go berserk in getting them looking pretty good.

 

The top row of washout plus looks to be horizontal whereas photos show it to be more steeply sloped than the lower row (which looks to be correct).  To me the cabside numberplate looks to be slightly too high and the RA disc is in the wrong place - but they might have copied a prototype pic where the disc was in the wrong place or they used a pre-war picture for a post-war livery ;).  The white 'X' above the numberplate is missing but might not have been present on the pic they copied (again possibly from using a pre-war picture?).  The rear sandbox looks a bit undernourished and too far inset.

 

It might be the angle of view but the leading tender footstep looks very odd with the bottom step completely missing and a strange 'L' shape at the leading end of the top step - which also doesn't align horizontally with the top step on the engine.  was the bottom step broken off the sample? And the tender footplate doesn't align with the running plate beneath the cab sidesheet.

 

So generally not too bad apart from the face not looking quite right because of the details I mentioned and some oddities with the tender.  None of which matter from my viewpoint as I have no need for one anyway.

Edited by The Stationmaster
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold
gwrrob

gwrrob

Posted
  • Author
  • RMweb Gold
Posted

Thanks Mike. The thing about Heljan is they're not very approachable even at Warley and it's probably too late to point out errors now. For over £!50 it will be a case of buy one or go without. Let's see what the green versions look like.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold
The Fatadder

The Fatadder

Posted
  • RMweb Gold
Posted

Hopefully there will be a green one to view at Warley, especially to see the smokebox with out it being defaced by BRs additions

 

Not impressed with their attempt at the number plate which is even worse than DJM!

 

At the moment my biggest concerns are the number plate, drain cocks and colour.

If the tender is rubbish it can go on eBay and be replaced with a resprayed Hornby one, but then it’s getting into the area of waiting for a sale or a second hand example rather than forming out £150 for it!

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold
The Stationmaster

The Stationmaster

Posted
  • RMweb Gold
Posted

Thanks Mike. The thing about Heljan is they're not very approachable even at Warley and it's probably too late to point out errors now. For over £!50 it will be a case of buy one or go without. Let's see what the green versions look like.

 

At least it will be easier to judge how good 'the face' is without the smokebox numberplate and shedplate.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Gold
  • Popular Post
gwrrob

gwrrob

Posted
  • Author
  • RMweb Gold
  • Popular Post
Posted

Another Chris Nevard shot sees Castle class 'Tintagel Castle' pass by as a pannier, 3796 , sits in the bay.

 

post-126-0-64500900-1511205069_thumb.jpg

 

 

Copyright Chris Nevard /Model Rail.

  • Like 21
Link to post
Share on other sites
Mulgabill

Mulgabill

Posted
Posted

Another Chris Nevard shot sees Castle class 'Tintagel Castle' pass by as a pannier, 3796 , sits in the bay.

 

attachicon.gifCastle Country.jpg

 

 

Copyright Chris Nevard /Model Rail.

Gives me a chance to say that I thought these pics were the better, but the Hornby Mag article gave a better overall impression of what we've known all along.

 

Well done Rob, keep it up.

Link to post
Share on other sites
brianusa

brianusa

Posted
Posted

Should it have splashers...? ;-p

Aren't they those round things above the wheels but as a comparative layman, if the GW went to the trouble of a brass dome on a freight loco, why not copper rim the funnel?  As they were on a few passenger trains, it would have been quite appropriate especially in green!  Can't argue about the rest of the comments but it's a good looking model.

 

Brian.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • RMweb Premium
St Enodoc

St Enodoc

Posted
  • RMweb Premium
Posted

There's something not quite right about the smokebox door - I think it's to do with the numberplate which looks to be very slightly too low and the shedplate looks too big and is definitely too low while the handrail curve from the smokebox side onto the smokebox front is not correct.  There looks to be a very poor representation of the lance cock which is unusual as nowadays everybody else seems to go berserk in getting them looking pretty good.

 

The top row of washout plus looks to be horizontal whereas photos show it to be more steeply sloped than the lower row (which looks to be correct).  To me the cabside numberplate looks to be slightly too high and the RA disc is in the wrong place - but they might have copied a prototype pic where the disc was in the wrong place or they used a pre-war picture for a post-war livery ;).  The white 'X' above the numberplate is missing but might not have been present on the pic they copied (again possibly from using a pre-war picture?).  The rear sandbox looks a bit undernourished and too far inset.

 

It might be the angle of view but the leading tender footstep looks very odd with the bottom step completely missing and a strange 'L' shape at the leading end of the top step - which also doesn't align horizontally with the top step on the engine.  was the bottom step broken off the sample? And the tender footplate doesn't align with the running plate beneath the cab sidesheet.

 

So generally not too bad apart from the face not looking quite right because of the details I mentioned and some oddities with the tender.  None of which matter from my viewpoint as I have no need for one anyway.

The cabside numberplate looks a bit underfed, as Cyril Freezer might have said. As I don't need one either, I'll shut up now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...